As long as Taiwan doesn't declare its independence, China won't be in a hurry to integrate Taiwan. Why would it attack Taiwan and destroy its own assets? That would be like the US attacking Hawaii and bombing Honolulu.
On the other hand, if Hawaii declared its independence, the US would not hesitate to attack it and bring it 'back to the fold', as happened with the Confederacy only a hundred and sixty years ago. As the US goes, so then China.
Comparing Hawaii to Taiwan makes no sense since Taiwan and China are two separate countries. A better comparison would be the hypothetical situation where Spain starts claiming Portugal is a part of Spain and then pressuring other countries to support that position.
I'm sorry, but did you read the introduction of the article? And are you familiar with the history of Hawaii ( that they were an independent country and have culture and history of their own)?
Taiwan is the remnants of the losing party of the Chinese civil war, that ran away to the island of Taiwan/Formosa, and assimilated the locals. It's like if the Confederacy run away to Hawaii and genocided the locals. They're not a separate country legally, and don't even claim to be.
It’s clearly you who are not familiar with history. Hawaii and its position in the US might be compared to Xinjiang and its position in China. But Taiwan is totally different. Taiwan just isn’t a part of of China/PRC. It was before and a some people think it should be again, but today Taiwan/ROC and China/PRC are two separate states.
Nope, you're just conflicting history, international law and recognition, and perception of the current situation. You can't talk about "familiarity with history" and "but today". Precisely because the history is so complicated the "today" is too.
How is Taiwan totally different? The Kuomintang lost the civil war, and ran away to Formosa/Taiwan, where they assimilated the local population by not always nice means. (The comparison with Hawaii is valid only in an alternate universe where the CSA run away there and just continued to exist.) There was never a peace treaty, and up until very recently the ROC still pretended to be "the one and only China". They don't themselves claim to be an independent country, and aren't one de jure ( probably to a significant extent because they fear China's retribution if they do so, but still). As far as China and literally almost all of the world are concerned, Taiwan is an island belonging to China. The legitimate Chinese government is the PRC.
The de facto situation is that Taiwan is for most intents and purposes an independent country, and the "ideal" solution is for them to just become one, but China has no desire ( and why should they have it?) to just let go of something they consider theirs.
It should furthermore be noted that China has experience with temporarily ceded territory they retake after tens if not hundreds of years ( Hong Kong, Liaoning, Manchuria, Qingdao, etc.), so i don't think they see things as "this land hasn't been ours for X time, it's no longer a part of us".
I'm not sure what to say about your comparison to Hawaii. Hawaii has been dominated by the US since it was conquered. Xinjiang and Tibet have been dominated by the PRC for a long time. Taiwan has _never_ been controlled by the PRC. To say they are the same is delusional. I'll just leave this topic because you seem to be set on believing this more than really thinking critically about it. Think what you will.
As far as China and literally almost all of the world are concerned, Taiwan is an island belonging to China. The legitimate Chinese government is the PRC.
Which countries take this stance? For example, the US certainly does not say that Taiwan is PRC territory. There's never been any UN decision saying so either. So I'd be interested to hear what countries you're referring to considering it's apparently "almost all the world".
It should furthermore be noted that China has experience with temporarily ceded territory they retake after tens if not hundreds of years ( Hong Kong, Liaoning, Manchuria, Qingdao, etc.), so i don't think they see things as "this land hasn't been ours for X time, it's no longer a part of us".
Yeah it's pretty standard for countries to try to legitimize their military imperialism. It's much easier than to admit as a society that you're just a bunch of warmongers opportunistically oppressing weaker peoples. China really isn't any different.
You're too hung up on the Hawaii example, so I'll clarify again - it'd be exactly the same scenario if the Confederacy run away to it and stayed there while assimilating the local population. They didn't, so it's not the same.
As for the stance, the US officially recognises the PRC's claim over Taiwan. The rest of the world recognises the PRC as the one and only China, and nobody recognises Taiwan as an independent country. Which means that either Taiwan doesn't exist, or is within the PRC for everyone de jure.
I'm sorry, but.. i don't even know how to respond to the last bit. I give you examples of China taking back lands they were deprived of for decades by foreign imperialists ( Hong Kong and co), and your response to this is that China is the imperialist warmonger in that situation? What were they to do, leave their territory partitioned by foreign colonialists? When France took back Alsace-Lorraine, or when Turkey fought against the Sevres treaty, was that an imperialist act? (The rest of what France was doing, and a lot of what China is doing today are very much imperialist, but liberating your own lands from a foreign imperialist power is... not imperialism)
My whole point in this in these posts is that Taiwan's situation is _not_ comparable to Hawaii. Your initial response was to question my knowledge of history and the situation. But given that you here are tacitly admitting that Hawaii really isn't comparable to Taiwan I guess I can drop the subject. You don't yet seem to be able to openly admit the comparison was wrong, but you at least (subconsciously maybe?) understand it to be the case so I'll settle with that.
As for the stance, the US officially recognises the PRC's claim over Taiwan.
I'm sorry, but are you saying the US has recognized the PRC's claim to Taiwan? I'm probably just misreading you, but in that case, you are totally wrong. Is that what you believe?
The rest of the world recognises the PRC as the one and only China, and nobody recognises Taiwan as an independent country. Which means that either Taiwan doesn't exist, or is within the PRC for everyone de jure.
Yeah you now basically almost understand it. If you want to be most accurate, basically the US doesn't have an official stance as to who governs Taiwan. As in, they do not exist if you want to put it that way. If that seems like a silly position, you must realize that it's really just a pretend game to placate China. Of course the US considers the ROC the true government of Taiwan considering the myriad of ways the US deals with it (economy, travel, military, etc.), but they wont say it out loud because that way they can exploit China's markets while playing to Chinese denial of reality. Regardless, no the US has not taken the position that Taiwan is PRC territory. That is a fact that you might want to internalize. I'm pretty sure it's exactly the same situation with the vast majority of countries (certainly in Europe, but I can't speak to the whole world).
I'm sorry, but.. i don't even know how to respond to the last bit. I give you examples of China taking back lands they were deprived of for decades by foreign imperialists ( Hong Kong and co), and your response to this is that China is the imperialist warmonger in that situation? What were they to do, leave their territory partitioned by foreign colonialists? When France took back Alsace-Lorraine, or when Turkey fought against the Sevres treaty, was that an imperialist act? (The rest of what France was doing, and a lot of what China is doing today are very much imperialist, but liberating your own lands from a foreign imperialist power is... not imperialism)
China is trying to take over lands and peoples that have basically been separate for 120 years. Those peoples don't want to be a part of China. Just accept it. China is a warmonger and an imperialist. It would be no different than if Russia invaded all its former lands in Europe because they were part of the Russian empire 100 years back. Stop trying to pretend that other countries' past actions legitimize China's. Have a little self-respect.
History (and how it's manipulated) is just another layer of legitimacy for PRC claims over TW. PRC will still operate on the logic that ROC territories whether gained by Japanese ceding postwar or ROC colonization was legally reverted to PRC when UN recognition for China switched to PRC from ROC. Just like how formally, the PRC/ROC civil war continues. As long as formalities (at UN) is on PRC side, it has discourse power and political flexibility to reunify/"invade" TW with reduced cost.
Comments
With a whimper.
As long as Taiwan doesn't declare its independence, China won't be in a hurry to integrate Taiwan. Why would it attack Taiwan and destroy its own assets? That would be like the US attacking Hawaii and bombing Honolulu.
On the other hand, if Hawaii declared its independence, the US would not hesitate to attack it and bring it 'back to the fold', as happened with the Confederacy only a hundred and sixty years ago. As the US goes, so then China.
Comparing Hawaii to Taiwan makes no sense since Taiwan and China are two separate countries. A better comparison would be the hypothetical situation where Spain starts claiming Portugal is a part of Spain and then pressuring other countries to support that position.
I'm sorry, but did you read the introduction of the article? And are you familiar with the history of Hawaii ( that they were an independent country and have culture and history of their own)?
Taiwan is the remnants of the losing party of the Chinese civil war, that ran away to the island of Taiwan/Formosa, and assimilated the locals. It's like if the Confederacy run away to Hawaii and genocided the locals. They're not a separate country legally, and don't even claim to be.
It’s clearly you who are not familiar with history. Hawaii and its position in the US might be compared to Xinjiang and its position in China. But Taiwan is totally different. Taiwan just isn’t a part of of China/PRC. It was before and a some people think it should be again, but today Taiwan/ROC and China/PRC are two separate states.
Nope, you're just conflicting history, international law and recognition, and perception of the current situation. You can't talk about "familiarity with history" and "but today". Precisely because the history is so complicated the "today" is too.
How is Taiwan totally different? The Kuomintang lost the civil war, and ran away to Formosa/Taiwan, where they assimilated the local population by not always nice means. (The comparison with Hawaii is valid only in an alternate universe where the CSA run away there and just continued to exist.) There was never a peace treaty, and up until very recently the ROC still pretended to be "the one and only China". They don't themselves claim to be an independent country, and aren't one de jure ( probably to a significant extent because they fear China's retribution if they do so, but still). As far as China and literally almost all of the world are concerned, Taiwan is an island belonging to China. The legitimate Chinese government is the PRC.
The de facto situation is that Taiwan is for most intents and purposes an independent country, and the "ideal" solution is for them to just become one, but China has no desire ( and why should they have it?) to just let go of something they consider theirs.
It should furthermore be noted that China has experience with temporarily ceded territory they retake after tens if not hundreds of years ( Hong Kong, Liaoning, Manchuria, Qingdao, etc.), so i don't think they see things as "this land hasn't been ours for X time, it's no longer a part of us".
I'm not sure what to say about your comparison to Hawaii. Hawaii has been dominated by the US since it was conquered. Xinjiang and Tibet have been dominated by the PRC for a long time. Taiwan has _never_ been controlled by the PRC. To say they are the same is delusional. I'll just leave this topic because you seem to be set on believing this more than really thinking critically about it. Think what you will.
Which countries take this stance? For example, the US certainly does not say that Taiwan is PRC territory. There's never been any UN decision saying so either. So I'd be interested to hear what countries you're referring to considering it's apparently "almost all the world".
Yeah it's pretty standard for countries to try to legitimize their military imperialism. It's much easier than to admit as a society that you're just a bunch of warmongers opportunistically oppressing weaker peoples. China really isn't any different.
You're too hung up on the Hawaii example, so I'll clarify again - it'd be exactly the same scenario if the Confederacy run away to it and stayed there while assimilating the local population. They didn't, so it's not the same.
As for the stance, the US officially recognises the PRC's claim over Taiwan. The rest of the world recognises the PRC as the one and only China, and nobody recognises Taiwan as an independent country. Which means that either Taiwan doesn't exist, or is within the PRC for everyone de jure.
I'm sorry, but.. i don't even know how to respond to the last bit. I give you examples of China taking back lands they were deprived of for decades by foreign imperialists ( Hong Kong and co), and your response to this is that China is the imperialist warmonger in that situation? What were they to do, leave their territory partitioned by foreign colonialists? When France took back Alsace-Lorraine, or when Turkey fought against the Sevres treaty, was that an imperialist act? (The rest of what France was doing, and a lot of what China is doing today are very much imperialist, but liberating your own lands from a foreign imperialist power is... not imperialism)
My whole point in this in these posts is that Taiwan's situation is _not_ comparable to Hawaii. Your initial response was to question my knowledge of history and the situation. But given that you here are tacitly admitting that Hawaii really isn't comparable to Taiwan I guess I can drop the subject. You don't yet seem to be able to openly admit the comparison was wrong, but you at least (subconsciously maybe?) understand it to be the case so I'll settle with that.
I'm sorry, but are you saying the US has recognized the PRC's claim to Taiwan? I'm probably just misreading you, but in that case, you are totally wrong. Is that what you believe?
Yeah you now basically almost understand it. If you want to be most accurate, basically the US doesn't have an official stance as to who governs Taiwan. As in, they do not exist if you want to put it that way. If that seems like a silly position, you must realize that it's really just a pretend game to placate China. Of course the US considers the ROC the true government of Taiwan considering the myriad of ways the US deals with it (economy, travel, military, etc.), but they wont say it out loud because that way they can exploit China's markets while playing to Chinese denial of reality. Regardless, no the US has not taken the position that Taiwan is PRC territory. That is a fact that you might want to internalize. I'm pretty sure it's exactly the same situation with the vast majority of countries (certainly in Europe, but I can't speak to the whole world).
China is trying to take over lands and peoples that have basically been separate for 120 years. Those peoples don't want to be a part of China. Just accept it. China is a warmonger and an imperialist. It would be no different than if Russia invaded all its former lands in Europe because they were part of the Russian empire 100 years back. Stop trying to pretend that other countries' past actions legitimize China's. Have a little self-respect.
History (and how it's manipulated) is just another layer of legitimacy for PRC claims over TW. PRC will still operate on the logic that ROC territories whether gained by Japanese ceding postwar or ROC colonization was legally reverted to PRC when UN recognition for China switched to PRC from ROC. Just like how formally, the PRC/ROC civil war continues. As long as formalities (at UN) is on PRC side, it has discourse power and political flexibility to reunify/"invade" TW with reduced cost.